Teams

Mangano/Concilla

2021 55&Over Women · 6.0

10 players · average NTRP 3.25 / WESTERN REGION

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2021-08-02vs HillWon 21
W#1 DoublesMARCY DEMBS / Susan Berger vs Mary Huntington / Michalene Sandore7-6, 6-0
L#2 DoublesRoberta Mangano / Susan O'Brien vs Cynthia Ciarpelli / J Hill6-7, 4-6
W#3 DoublesLyle Burns / Kim Waale vs Joan Archambeau / Ann Moskalyk6-4, 6-0
2021-07-19vs Western: FinneganLost 12
L#1 DoublesMARCY DEMBS / Juliet Concilla vs Marianne Lee / Veronica Hotaling6-4, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesRoberta Mangano / Kate Artessa vs Doreen Kingsley / Kim Cameron5-7, 2-6
W#3 DoublesRenee de Nevers / Susan O'Brien vs Donna OByrne / Wendi Richards6-4, 6-7, 1-0
2021-07-12vs HillWon 30
W#1 DoublesMARCY DEMBS / Juliet Concilla vs Suzanne Evans / Cynthia Ciarpelli6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKate Artessa / Roberta Mangano vs Shelley Smith / Joan Archambeau6-4, 7-6
W#3 DoublesRenee de Nevers / Kim Waale vs J Hill / Mary Pedley6-1, 6-1
2021-06-21vs Western: FinneganWon 21
W#1 DoublesMARCY DEMBS / Susan Berger vs Donna OByrne / Doreen Kingsley6-4, 6-0
W#2 DoublesSusan O'Brien / Juliet Concilla vs Kim Cameron / Lynn Horowitch6-3, 6-0
L#3 DoublesRoberta Mangano / Kate Artessa vs Veronica Hotaling / Marianne Lee1-6, 2-6
2021-06-14vs HillWon 21
W#1 DoublesMARCY DEMBS / Juliet Concilla vs Gillian Epstein / Suzanne Evans6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesLyle Burns / Roberta Mangano vs J Hill / Shelley Smith7-5, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesRenee de Nevers / Nicole Christina vs Ann Moskalyk / Ellie Peavey6-3, 6-2
2021-05-24vs Western: FinneganWon 21
W#1 DoublesJuliet Concilla / Susan Berger vs Doreen Kingsley / Diane Finnegan7-6, 6-1
W#2 DoublesKate Artessa / Susan O'Brien vs Deborah Severino / Laurie Glathar6-2, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSandy Sulik / Roberta Mangano vs Alice Massa / Kim Cameron2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2021-05-17vs HillWon 30
W#1 DoublesRoberta Mangano / Susan Berger vs Shelley Smith / Suzanne Evans6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMARCY DEMBS / Kim Waale vs Joan Archambeau / Ann Moskalyk6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesRenee de Nevers / Nicole Christina vs Ellie Peavey / Mary Pedley6-1, 6-0
2021-05-03vs Western: FinneganLost 12
L#1 DoublesRoberta Mangano / Juliet Concilla vs Doreen Kingsley / Donna OByrne7-6, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesKim Waale / Susan O'Brien vs Tracey Bousquet / Wendi Richards6-2, 7-5
L#3 DoublesSandy Sulik / Renee de Nevers vs Diane Finnegan / Laurie Glathar7-6, 5-7, 0-1
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.
Flight standings3 teams · 6.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Mangano/Concilla6216820189
2Western: Finnegan6217720202
3Hill0832143284

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 2.92 estimated across 3 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

3.24
Susan Berger
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.91
Juliet Concilla
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3
2.60
Renee de Nevers
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Kate Artessa
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Kim Waale
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
MARCY DEMBS
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
Nicole Christina
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Roberta Mangano
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Sandy Sulik
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Susan O'Brien
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Juliet Concilla + Susan Berger19760% games+2.7% vs expected
Juliet Concilla + Roberta Mangano8163% games−1.2% vs expected
Juliet Concilla + MARCY DEMBS3257% games−1.9% vs expected
Juliet Concilla + Susan O'Brien8262% gamesnot enough data
Kate Artessa + Roberta Mangano7357% gamesnot enough data
Susan O'Brien + Susan Berger4549% gamesnot enough data
MARCY DEMBS + Susan Berger6258% gamesnot enough data
Susan O'Brien + Roberta Mangano3543% gamesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

3.5
Susan Berger
95W–83L career · 4 lines in 2021
3%94%2%
3.24
3
Juliet Concilla
131W–137L career · 8 lines in 2021
<1%75%25%
2.91
Renee de Nevers
43W–61L career · 5 lines in 2021
22%78%<1%
2.60
Kate Artessa
20W–6L career · 4 lines in 2021
not enough data
Kim Waale
81W–50L career · 6 lines in 2021
not enough data
MARCY DEMBS
46W–33L career · 6 lines in 2021
not enough data
Nicole Christina
28W–52L career · 4 lines in 2021
not enough data
Roberta Mangano
41W–25L career · 8 lines in 2021
not enough data
Sandy Sulik
19W–38L career · 2 lines in 2021
not enough data
Susan O'Brien
54W–38L career · 5 lines in 2021
not enough data

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.